alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
                
                Defense Logistics Agency
                        The Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency
                    DLA
            Search
                        Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                            Search
                    Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                        Search
    Home

    What DLA Offers
    
        Excess Property Disposal

    Document Services

    Products

    Services

    Programs

    Working With DLA
    
        Applications

    Small Business

    Federal and International Cataloging

    Defense Data Standards

    Events

    Procurement Policies

    Government Programs

    Forms

    Organizations
    
        DLA Headquarters

    DLA Aviation

    DLA Disposition Services

    DLA Distribution

    DLA Energy

    DLA Land and Maritime

    DLA Troop Support

    DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM

    DLA Europe & Africa

    DLA Indo-Pacific

    Customer Support
    
        Self Help Tools

    How to Order

    Find Your Order

    Customer Facing Offices

    Training

    Brochures

    Warfighter Support

    Customer Service Management

    Careers

    About DLA
    
        Contact Us

    Locations

    Leaders

    News

    History

    Media Gallery

    DLA Campaigns  Home
  Land and Maritime
  About
  DLA Land and Maritime Image Galleries
 DLA Land and Maritime images
 Supply Chain Alliance and Exhibition
 DLA Land and Maritime News
 Hall of Fame Ceremonies
 DSCC Activities
 DLA Land and Maritime Hall of Fame ceremonies
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (0.14 MB)
 
 DLA Aviation People and culture Employee spotlight DLA at Ogden
 Photo Gallery
 2024 DLA Supply Chain Alliance Conference and Exhibition Image Gallery
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (0.14 MB)
 
 DLA Aviation People and culture Employee spotlight DLA at Ogden
 Photo Gallery
 DLA Land and Maritime news
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (0.14 MB)
 
 DLA Aviation People and culture Employee spotlight DLA at Ogden
 Photo Gallery
 DSCC activities
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (0.14 MB)
 
 DLA Aviation People and culture Employee spotlight DLA at Ogden
 Photo Gallery
 Contact UsSite IndexStrategic PlanDLA IG HotlineFOIANo FEAR ActWhistleblower ProtectionDLA CareersImagesWebmasterEEOSection 508Public AffairsSAPRExternal Links DisclaimerDOD Information Quality GuidelinesPrivacy/SecurityUSA.govDOD Web PolicyDOD Open GovernmentPlain Language
                    Stay Connected
            
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
No. 10-7528.

#### James R. Goff, Petitioner v. Margaret Bagley, Warden.

562 U.S. 1202, 131 S. Ct. 1045,

178 L. Ed. 2d 868,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 1048.

January 24, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 601 F.3d 445.
# C_2015146EN.01003701.xml

| 4.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 146/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/37

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 March 2015 — Intermark v OHIM — Coca-Cola (RIENERGY Cola)

(Case T-384/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark RIENERGY Cola - Earlier Community figurative mark Coca-Cola and earlier Community word mark COCA-COLA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 146/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Intermark Srl (Stei, Romania) (represented initially by Á. László, and subsequently by B. Bozóki, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented initially by A. Pohlmann, and subsequently by M. Fischer, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: The Coca-Cola Company (Atlanta, Georgia, United States) (represented by: L. Alonso Domingo, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 May 2013 (Case R 1116/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between The Coca-Cola Company and Intermark Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the action;

| 2) | Orders Intermark Srl to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders Intermark Srl to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 260, 7.9.2013.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                            9
<LEGEND>
The schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  derived  from  Heritage
Bancorp,  Inc.'s  unaudited  financial  statements  for the  nine  months  ended
September  30,  1999,  and is  qualified  in its  entirety by  reference to such
financial statements and the notes thereto.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         1,736,000
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         36,759,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               7,700,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    23,023,000
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           0
<LOANS>                                        29,186,000
<ALLOWANCE>                                    437,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 63,198,000
<DEPOSITS>                                     50,215,000
<SHORT-TERM>                                   4,103,000
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            77,000
<LONG-TERM>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       2,295,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     6,508,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 8,803,000
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                2,014,000
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              1,036,000
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               213,000
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               3,263,000
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             1,029,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,092,000
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          2,171,000
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  18,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             1,000
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                2,059,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                244,000
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     244,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   165,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .07
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                 4.85
<LOANS-NON>                                    3,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                   323,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                564,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               429,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  20,000
<RECOVERIES>                                   10,000
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              437,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           200,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                            0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        237,000


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Christopher P. Westad, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Able Energy, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the condensed consolidated financial statements, and
other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in
all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly
report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's registered public accounting firm and the audit committee of the
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: May 16, 2005



           /S/ Christopher P. Westad
------------------------------------------------
             Christopher P. Westad
            Chief Financial Officer
         (Principal Financial Officer)
### 2/20/2015 Page of

INITIAL REVIEW EXPOSURE REPORT Summary Page

Chemical ID: P-15-0221 Reviewer: Tobias/SD

Endpoints-Assessed Table

Endpoints/Assessment Cycles 1 Releases Assessed in NCEM2? Reasons for not assessing releases

No XB Testing Required No Hazard Concern No Releases Release Below Acute Threshold 5 Release Below Chronic Threshold 5 Other

Ingestion Surface water Ground water (landfill) Consumer Use: DtD 2
Inhalation Air: incineration (stack) Air: fugitive Consumer Use: CEM 3
Dermal Consumer Use: CEM Eco Surface water: ADR conc and/or PDM 4
Consumer Use: DtD

1 Assessment cycles are endpoint concentrations and dose calculations within the NCEM2 model.
2 Down-the-Drain
3 Consumer Exposure Model
4 Probabilistic Dilution Model
5 The threshold values for assessing endpoints are 1 mg/day for acute doses and 1 mg/year for chronic doses.

EAB DROP: Release information for this compound does not meet criteria for preparation of an exposure assessment in the Exposure Assessment Branch’s (EAB) Initial Review Exposure Report (this report).
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

The undersigned officer of Albany Molecular Research, Inc. (the “Company”)hereby certifies to his knowledge that the Company’s quarterly report onForm 10-Q to which this certification is attached (the “Report”), as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and that theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Thiscertification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 andItem 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (“Item 601(b)(32)”)promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”),and the Exchange Act. In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), this certification (A) shall not be deemed “filed”for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject tothe liability of that section, and (B) shall not be deemed to beincorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or theExchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporatesit by reference.

 

 
| Date: May 10, 2005 | /s/ Mark T. Frost                                                            |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|               | Name: Mark T. Frost  Title: Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer |

 

1

----
**AGENDA**

**Joint Meeting of the**

**Supply Process Review Committee (PRC) and**

**Joint Physical Inventory Working Group (JPIWG)**

**Wednesday October 22 and Thursday, October 23, 2014**

**Focused Meeting:**

**Day 1 -**Maintaining Logistics Accountability during Organic Depot Maintenance 

(Depot Maintenance Inter-Service Support Agreement (DMISA) and intra–Component)

**Day 2 -**Maintaining Logistics Accountability during Depot Maintenance–Commercial Maintenance
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 17 (Tuesday, January 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3886-3887]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1871]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP98-180-000]


Great Lakes Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Request Under 
Blanket Authorization

January 21, 1998.
    Take notice that on January 13, 1998, Great Lakes Gas Transmission 
Company (Great Lakes), One Woodward Avenue, Suite 1600, Detroit, 
Michigan 48226, filed in Docket No. CP98-180-000 a request pursuant to 
Section 157.205 of

[[Page 3887]]

the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) 
to construct and operate a new delivery point (the Duck Creek delivery 
point) located in Gogebic County, Michigan to provide natural gas 
transportation service for Wisconsin Electric Power Company (WEPCO) and 
Wisconsin Public Service Corporation (WPS), under Great Lake's blanket 
certificates issued in Docket No. CP90-2053-000 pursuant to Section 7 
of the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set forth in the request 
which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    Great Lakes states that it has executed 10-year firm service 
agreements with WEPCO and WPS, two new shippers on Great Lakes' system. 
Great Lakes states further that the shippers would utilize Great Lakes' 
transportation to expand their retail natural gas distribution services 
within Wisconsin.
    Great Lakes indicates that the estimated cost of constructing the 
facilities is approximately $250,000.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after 
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to 
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of 
the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to 
the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefor, 
the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the 
day after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed 
and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a 
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for 
authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-1871 Filed 1-26-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit
4.4


 


Griffon
Corporation


100
Jericho Quadrangle


Jericho,
New York 11753-2794


(516)
938-5544 * (516)938-5644


 


 


 


 


 


 


                                                                                                                November
4, 2004


 


 


 


American Stock Transfer & Trust Company


59 Maiden Lane


Plaza Level


New York, NY 10038


Attn: 
Corporate Trust Department


By Certified, First Class Mail and by
Facsimile No.:  (718) 331-1852


 




	
  RE:

  	
  Griffon Corporation 4.0%
  Contingent Convertible Subordinated Notes

  
	
   

  	
  due 2023 (Second Series)

  






 


Ladies and Gentlemen:


 


                Reference
is hereby made to the Indenture, dated as of June 22, 2004, between American
Stock Transfer & Trust Company, as Trustee and Griffon Corporation , a
Delaware corporation (the “Company”). 
Capitalized terms used and not defined herein have the meanings ascribed
to them in the Indenture.


 


                Pursuant
to Article 10 of the Indenture, if any Securities are properly presented for
conversion, the Company may, at its option, instead of delivering shares of
Common Stock issuable upon conversion of such Securities, pay the Holder the
Cash Conversion Price.  The Company  hereby irrevocably elects, with respect to
each $1,000 principal amount of Securities tendered for conversion (and not
properly withdrawn in accordance with the Indenture), to (a) pay in cash the
Cash Election Amount (or such lesser amount, if the Cash Conversion Price with
respect to such Securities is less than $1,000) (the “Cash”) and (b) if the
Cash Conversion Price is greater than $1,000, deliver a number of shares of
Common Stock (appropriately adjusted to take into account the occurrence,
during the applicable five Trading Day period, of any event requiring
adjustment of Conversion Price) equal to the quotient obtained by dividing (x)
the excess of the Cash Conversion Price over the Cash by (y) the average of the
Closing Price of the Common Stock for each Trading Day in the applicable five
Trading Day period specified in the Indenture in the definition of “Cash
Conversion Price.”  The Company will
deliver the notice of the foregoing election (the “Notice of Election”) in
accordance with Section


 


 





















 


 


10.02 of the Indenture to each Holder who
tenders any Note for conversion.  The “Cash
Election Amount” means $1,000, unless the Company specifies  a greater amount in the applicable Notice of
Election.


 


                This
instrument shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of
the State of New York.


 


	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Very truly yours,

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  GRIFFON CORPORATION

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  /s/ Robert Balemian

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Robert Balemian

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  President
Exhibit 99.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 135O,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 0F 2002

In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of PocketSpec  Technologies  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending  October 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report').  I, F.
Jeffrey Krupka, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18
USC ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

     (1) The Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)The information  contained in the Report fully presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of the Company.

             By: /s/F. Jeffrey Krupka
                 -------------------------------------------
                 F. Jeffrey Krupka,  Chief Executive Officer



           Dated: 12/12/02
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-1710
PATRICIA F. APPLEGATE, R.N., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN MICHAEL FRAY, Phd.; ROBERT S. BOYD, Reverend; THE EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF VIRGINIA, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-95-814) Submitted: October 3, 1996 Decided: October 9, 1996 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Patricia F. Applegate, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Morris Holleran, MCGUIRE, WOODS, BATTLE & BOOTHE, L.L.P., Richmond, Virginia; Roger Louis Williams, WILLIAMS, BUTLER & PIERCE, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's orders granting Defendants' motions for summary judgment, dismissing her action, and denying her motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant in forma pauperis status and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Applegate v. Fray , No. CA95-814 (E.D. Va. Apr. 19 & May 17, 1996). We disp ense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED